i'd rather buy it on the street than buy it online. the problem is the time lag.

listen: if i wanted to buy it through the mail, i'd just get a medical card. but, then i need to make guesses on how much i want to buy over the course of a month. in the process, i'm going to end up smoking more than i want to. i won't do this; i'll continue to buy it underground, where i can get smaller amounts immediately on demand.

http://www.ottawasun.com/2017/06/15/dont-expect-legal-pot-stores-by-canada-day-2018-industry-expert-says

Also, conservatives in Canada's Parliament have brought up two notable concerns with legalization that could be difficult to overcome. For starters, lawmakers worry about how to keep marijuana out of the hands of children. An at-home grow provision, they argue, would make it easy for children to get hold of cannabis. The other issue being that there's no way to accurately test for cannabis impairment while behind the wheel. Without any sort of baseline impairment figure, it's difficult to see how conservatives in Canada's Parliament are going to be satisfied with this legislation.

but, conservatives have no power in canada's parliament, right now. a strict party vote would be 239-99. it's not even close.

....unless they mean the senate, but the conservatives do not have a majority in the senate either, no matter how you skew the numbers.

this worries me, though. it suggests that the liberals are floating flawed information to the press, with an attempt to engineer the defeat of the bill.

"but you can't say that homosexuality is a choice, because then religious fascists will be justified in arguing that it's ok to forcibly convert them."

what?

it's one of those weird "progressive" positions that only makes sense if you're a conservative pretending to be a "left-wing christian", as though such a thing is even possible.

i actually want to forget about the obvious logical problems with this, as though forced conversion ("gay therapy") is ever somehow justified. i mean, i'll be clear: "gay therapy" is never justified. it doesn't matter if it's a choice, it's still an egregious rights infringement, and your religion can go fuck itself up the ass. yeah, how about that, huh? it's especially egregious when applied towards children; it's child abuse. if you're out there walking around thinking that "gay therapy" would be perfectly ok if homosexuality were only a choice, but, alas, it isn't, so we should resist it because it won't work anyways then...!?!?...

...i don't know what side you think you're on....?

but, that's not even what i want to say. you've got the logic fucked, anyways.

let's say we get this gay guy tied down and try and brainwash him, clockwork orange style, into being straight. we already know this doesn't work. yet, you want to argue that it doesn't work because he doesn't have a choice?

no. ...

if he really didn't have a choice, that is if it was really hardwired somewhere into his brain, you should be able to "flip the switch". otherwise, being gay would be pretty much singularly unique, wouldn't it? i mean, you can flip just about any switch you can imagine. with the right images, you can get an army sergeant in a ballerina dress, singing rocket man. rocket mensch, probably.

is it just a wild coincidence that homosexuality is pretty much the only thing we've ever found that you can't flip? really?

i might suggest that the reason the brainwashing is so ineffective in most gay people is that they're able to reject it for the precise reason that it is a conscious choice and, further, that if it weren't a conscious choice then the brainwashing would largely work.

it seems clear to me that the reason that putin is not permitted to speak english on english media is that he sounds much less ominous.

i'm not sure on whose orders, though.